To evaluate the efficacy and safety of plasmakinetic resection of the prostate （PKRP） versus transurethral resection of the prostate （TURP） for the treatment of patients with benign prostate hyperplasia （BPH）, a...To evaluate the efficacy and safety of plasmakinetic resection of the prostate （PKRP） versus transurethral resection of the prostate （TURP） for the treatment of patients with benign prostate hyperplasia （BPH）, a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials was carried out. We searched PubMed, Embase, Web of Science and the Cochrane Library. The pooled estimates of maximum flow rate, International Prostate Symptom Score, operation time, catheterization time, irrigated volume, hospital stay, transurethral resection syndrome, transfusion, clot retention, urinary retention and urinary stricture were assessed. There was no notable difference in International Prostate Symptom Score between TURP and PKRP groups during the 1-month, 3 months, 6 months and 12 months follow-up period, while the pooled Qmax at 1-month favored PKRP group. PKRP group was related to a lower risk rate of transurethral resection syndrome, transfusion and clot retention, and the catheterization time and operation time were also shorter than that of TURP. The irrigated volume, length of hospital stay, urinary retention and urinary stricture rate were similar between groups. In conclusion, our study suggests that the PKRP is a reliable minimal invasive technique and may anticipatoriiy prove to be an alternative electrosurgical procedure for the treatment of BPH.展开更多
文摘To evaluate the efficacy and safety of plasmakinetic resection of the prostate （PKRP） versus transurethral resection of the prostate （TURP） for the treatment of patients with benign prostate hyperplasia （BPH）, a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials was carried out. We searched PubMed, Embase, Web of Science and the Cochrane Library. The pooled estimates of maximum flow rate, International Prostate Symptom Score, operation time, catheterization time, irrigated volume, hospital stay, transurethral resection syndrome, transfusion, clot retention, urinary retention and urinary stricture were assessed. There was no notable difference in International Prostate Symptom Score between TURP and PKRP groups during the 1-month, 3 months, 6 months and 12 months follow-up period, while the pooled Qmax at 1-month favored PKRP group. PKRP group was related to a lower risk rate of transurethral resection syndrome, transfusion and clot retention, and the catheterization time and operation time were also shorter than that of TURP. The irrigated volume, length of hospital stay, urinary retention and urinary stricture rate were similar between groups. In conclusion, our study suggests that the PKRP is a reliable minimal invasive technique and may anticipatoriiy prove to be an alternative electrosurgical procedure for the treatment of BPH.
